[Note: This post just vanished. I'm copying from the mirror site where it had already been posted. I'm not sure of the time of this entry; I've chosen a time around when I think it originally went up.]

Democracy Now! ("always worth watching," as Marcia says)

Headlines for June 24, 2005- KKK Leader Sentenced to 60 Years For 1964 Killings- CPB Appoints Former GOP Co-Chair As New President- Cities Given OK to Seize Homes To Spur Economic Development- UN Investigators Accusing U.S. of Torture At Guantanamo- Sen. Kennedy to Rumsfeld: "Isn't It Time For You to Resign?"- Senators Introduce Community Broadband Bill- World Tribunal on Iraq Opens In Turkey- Industrial Workers of the World Marks 100th Anniversary

Sen. Kennedy to Rumsfeld: "Isn't It Time For You to Resign?" On Capitol Hill, Secretary of Defense Donald Rumsfeld came under intense questioning Thursday during a hearing before the Senate Armed Services Committee. The Washington Post described it as some of the toughest questioning that Rumsfeld since the war began. During the hearing Senator Ted Kennedy asked Rumsfeld when he is going to resign.Kennedy: You basically have mismanaged the war and created an impossible situation for military recruiters and our national security. Our troops deserve better. I think America deserves better. They deserve competency and they deserve the facts. In baseball, it is three strikes and you are out. What is it for the secretary?Rumsfeld defended his actions in Iraq and denied that the U.S. was stuck in a quagmire or losing the war. However Army General John Abizaid -- the country's top commander in the Middle East -- admitted the the Iraqi resistance remains strong. This is an exchange between Abizaid and Democratic Senator Carl Levin who asked Abizaid if he agrees with Vice President Cheney's comment that the Iraqi resistance is in its "last throes."Abizaid: In terms of six months ago. In terms of foreign fighters, I believe there are more foreign fighters coming into iraq than there were six months ago. In terms of the strength of the insurgency, I would say it is about the same as it was six months ago.Levin: So you wouldn't agree with the statement that it's in its last throes?Abizaid: I don't think I would make any statement about that. There's a lot of work to be done against the insurgency.

Pentagon Developing Massive Database on Millions of U.S. StudentsThe Pentagon is working with a private company to create information dossiers on millions of young Americans to help identify college and high school students as young as 16 to target for military recruiting. We speak with the executive director of the Electronic Privacy Center and Rep. Mike Honda (D-CA

At The Daily Howler, Bob Somerby's dealing with broad vistas. We're focusing on the Downing Street Memo and members do like Naomi Wolf but we're not omitting Somerby's critique of her to avoid it. Go to the site and read the full Howler:

PART 4--DOWNING STREET NO-SHOWS: Uh-oh! A few weeks after the Downing Street memo, Vice President Cheney began scaring the country about Saddam’s non-existent nukes. And yes, he was vastly overstating the intel--in line with the Downing Street memo's suggestion. Surely, you recall that famous memo--the one with that tantalizing line?DOWNING STREET MEMO (7/23/02): C reported on his recent talks in Washington. There was a perceptible shift in attitude. Military action was now seen as inevitable. Bush wanted to remove Saddam, through military action, justified by the conjunction of terrorism and WMD. But the intelligence and facts were being fixed around the policy. The NSC had no patience with the UN route, and no enthusiasm for publishing material on the Iraqi regime's record. There was little discussion in Washington of the aftermath after military action.Ever since the memo appeared, various scribes have tried to figure what that highlighted phrase really meant. Did it really mean that the Bush Admin had plans to "fix" (misstate) the intelligence? Scribes have tried to puzzle this out by staring long and hard at the memo. But sadly, the memo can't interpret itself. By contrast, though, real events--real information--can shed light on the matters at hand.Did the Bush Admin start to misstate the intel shortly after the Downing Street memo? Of course they did, as becomes quite clear reading Plan of Attack, Bob Woodward's much-ballyhooed, little-read book. About a month after that Downing Street memo, Cheney made a major speech; in it, he mildly misstated the general intel--but he grossly misstated the existing intelligence about Saddam’s frightening nukes (see THE DAILY HOWLER, 6/23/05). And this was the start of a "harm offensive" in which a string of major Bush Admin players went out there and pimped Saddam's nukes. Cheney made two August speeches; in each, he grossly misstated the intelligence. Then, the Admin pimped a tale to the New York Times about those troubling aluminum tubes; the story hit the front page on September 8, but turned out, in the end, to be bogus. And uh-oh! That same day, Condi Rice went on CNN and flatly misstated the existing intelligence about the scary aluminum tubes; they could only be used for nukes, she said, although the intel said something quite different. By October 7, as a matter of fact, Bush himself was scaring us blue about the threat of a nuclear war. This offensive began a couple of weeks after that suggestive Downing Street memo. What did that phrase from the memo really mean? It's hard to tell, and we don't have a tape of what "C" really told Tony Blair. But if you know how to read a book, it's easy to see that the Bush Admin was "fixing the intelligence" soon after that memo. And by the way, it wasn't just the nukes that were being "fixed." On September 26, 2002, Bush restated his "new unequivocal charge" about WMD--the one he'd adopted, for the first time, two weeks after the Downing Street memo. And when the great war leader spoke, he pimped another phony tale, too. Treat yourself to a mordant chuckle as Woodward gives Tenet's reaction:WOODWARD (page 189): Repeating the new unequivocal charge about Iraq's WMD programs he had adopted three weeks earlier, Bush said, "The Iraqi regime possesses biological and chemical weapons. The Iraqi regime is building the facilities necessary to make more." Ratcheting up another notch, he added,"And according to the British government, the Iraqi regime could launch a biological or chemical attack in as little as 45 minutes after the order were given."Tenet and the CIA had warned the British not to make that allegation, which was based on a questionable source, and almost certainly referred to battlefield weapons--not ones that Iraq could launch at neighboring countries, let alone American cities. Tenet referred privately to this as the “they-can-attack-in-45-minutes-sh*t.” So according to Woodward, Bush was soon out there talking "sh*t" about this other scary matter! By the way, where was Bush's National Security Adviser while all this lunacy was occurring? Oh yeah! She was also out there talking "shit" too, about those scary aluminum tubes. None of this is any big mystery. You just have to read Woodward's book.

Note, there is a planned Howler for Saturday. And our plan here is to note it on Saturday.(See note at the bottom of the excerpts.)

Larry e-mails to note that Naomi Klein has an interview with Jean Bertrand Aristide (President of Haiti, in forced exile) at No Logo. (No Logo does not provide indivudal links so clicking will take you to the main page. It is currently the top entry on the No Logo home page.) From the preface to the interview:

On June 20, Naomi Klein conducted an extensive interview with ousted Haitian President Jean Bertrand Aristide for a forthcoming book. The interview took place in Pretoria, South Africa, where President Aristide is living in exile. For the first time, President Aristide spoke on record about the role played by Canada in his February 2004 ouster and the tumultuous period since. The interview comes following last week’s Montreal International Conference on Haiti, where a protester splashed the hands of Foreign Minister Pierre Pettigrew with red paint at press conference on June 17. While Aristide was clear that he did not condone such an action, he did tell Ms. Klein that due to its support for the February 2004 coup that overthrew him and subsequent training of the Haitian National Police, "some people in the Canadian government and the Canadian army have Haitian blood on their hands." For his part, Minister Pettigrew continues to deny the widespread reports of killings of innocent demonstrators carried out by Canadian-trained Haitian police.

Yes, it's a crude form of speech, and it antagonizes others, but part of being free is allowing, even valuing, crude and antagonistic speech.This proposed amendment could douse more speech than just flag-burning, however.The resolution the House passed reads: "The Congress shall have power to prohibit the physical desecration of the flag of the United States."But how do you define "physical desecration"?Are you desecrating the flag when you fly it upside down as a distress symbol?Are you desecrating it when you draw red drops symbolizing blood that drip from the red stripes?Are you desecrating it when you design a T-shirt or poster that superimposes the words "Sit. Stay. Fetch. Heel. Roll Over. Play Dead. Kill." on the stripes, as the former art director of The Progressive, Patrick Flynn, did so powerfully?Would that be verboten, too?

John Cory, a Vietnam veteran and recipient of the Purple Heart and Bronze Star, asks:"What the hell is wrong with you Democratic politicians? Why do you turn on each other? Why won't you stand by your own words and ideals? Why do you keep apologizing for telling the truth? And why can't anyone see McCain's true colors? Or Lieberman or Biden? And why in God's name do you expect folks like me to come support you after you turn tail and run?We know the truth out here. We will stand with anyone who stands up for us. Where are you?"I couldn't say it any better. It's simple. I am willing to support Democrats when they show they are willing to support what we can all see is clear truth, regardless of what the cable news networks are screeching on and on about.I'm not going to get all hot under the collar about Karl Rove's ignorant comments. It's his job to be an asshole and to inflict damage upon the Democrats - if he can. He's very good at what he does. And, as far as the media goes, he gets away with it - even when he's purposefully dividing America. I think many Americans see right through his shenanigans - and you Democrats, by backing down from your own convictions, are showing that you have lost faith in the critical thinking skills of independent Americans. I regret seeing Karl Rove and Company get the better of you.I'm a lot angrier with Dick Durbin for giving me temporary encouragement for exposing the torture at Guantanamo, and then sending my confidence crashing to the ground with an apology that never should have been made. I've been so upset that I've held my tongue - until now.

Liberals aren't killing our troops. I'll give that credit to the war cheerleaders who couldn't give two sh*ts about the lack of armor for our forces in Iraq, or about the lies that put them there for no discernable reason. The same people who couldn't care whether this administration has a victory strategy, or whether we have the manpower to fight the war effectively.American politics has reached a new low these past two three days. And given the desperation of the war cheerleaders, it's only going to get worse. It's the only way they can cover their spectacular failures.

Now (this is the later part, noted after the excerpt from Somerby), my apologies to Cedric. He e-mailed to suggest that on Friday mornings, I note what's going on for the weekend. It was a great idea but it didn't happen. My apologies to Cedric. I didn't realize that Kat and Isaiah were both going to have contributions this morning. Kat has the password (as does Ava) and can log into the Blogger account but she noted in her e-mail that she was exhausted from working on the review (which is an excellent review, by the way) (and thank you, Kat, as always) and was just pasting it into an e-mail instead of going to trouble of logging in, pasting, spacing*, indexing and then publishing. With regards to Isaiah's latest The World Today Just Nuts, it's up twice. My intent was to make the visual the last thing up until the Democracy Now! post (this post). So I published it last. It's up twice because I couldn't see it (it published under Kat's review) and quickly tried to republish it.

(Ruth e-mailed her's last night. I didn't copy and paste it until this morning but I could have so it was my fault for not being better organized.)

(*"Spacing." When text is e-mailed for a post and it is copied and pasted into the Blogger screen, everything runs together -- "everythingrunstogether." I note that, again, because if you see a mistake in one of my entries, it's my own stupidity. If you see one in Ruth, Kat or any member who composes an entry, it's more than likely still my stupidity. If I'm hurrying, I may hold down on the delete key too long and knock out a letter or two. I've lost whole words before. So, for the record, if there's a mistake here, whether it's something I wrote, something Kat wrote, something Ruth wrote, something Dallas wrote, something Rob & Kara wrote, always assume I erred when copying and pasting.)

Cedric's idea was a strong one but I'm willing to bet it will always be one that I'm running behind on. So what's up for the weekend?

Tonight, we'll note the Sunday Chat & Chew lineup (as always). We'll note Air America's Weekend Schedule tonight or tomorrow night (depending on what time it is put up). Beth's got her interview planned tonight. (She is our public editor.) Provided that interview takes place, I'll be bringing up one topic, drive-by e-mails. There are several this week that have really bothered me but I'll focus on the one that accuses someone of a crime and, though the e-mailer didn't realize, I know the man being accused. Beth will have her own series of topics she wants to explore. So it should make for an interesting read when it goes up. (If it's done tonight, it may go up tonight. But it's Beth's call on that -- and on whether she wants to include links to things referred to in the interview or not.)

But Cedric was hoping that a head's up could be given regarding The Third Estate Sunday Review. That's the site run by community members Ava, Jim, Ty, Jess and Dona. Rebecca, Betty, Kat and myself will be assisting them. And as always community member Dallas will be hunting down links. Michael is someone they'd like to a piece on but there are time issues for Michael this weekend and there's also the issue of the theme for this edition.

What will the theme be? Will it even have one? I don't know and I don't know.

How much in the dark are Ava and I? So in the dark that we watched The O.C., Stacked and a crime show this week (and made notes on everyone) so that when the theme is decided upon, we can pull together a review. If it's another nod to the sixties, we'll go with the crime show. If it's a summer theme (which is my guess) we'll probaby go with The O.C. (We did attempt to watch the WB's Summerland but I fell asleep on the phone with Ava -- not a reflection on Summerland which hadn't even started.) (Nor a reflection on Ava. Just a reflection of me being exhausted.)

One thing that is agreed upon is that no one wants to start off next week (Sunday) still up and attempting to pull an edition together. (There were problems with Blogger losing the posts last weekend.)

If it's the summer theme (which doesn't necessarily imply what some may think), Ty's started something as have Ava & I. And there's something Dona's begun and sent around for input that would also fit in nicely with that theme.

Kat's noted at her site that for the upcoming "Five Books, Five Minutes" will include a U2 book (a collection of writings that appeared in Rolling Stone magazine). I can add to that it also includes Alice Walker's Absolute Trust in the Goodness of the Earth. (Yes, I know all five but since Kat gave up one, I think I can drop a dime on one as well without giving up too much.)

Since it's no longer the early morning hours, I did call to Ava & Dona's and Jim said the theme is still up in the air currently. That's as of a few minutes ago.

-----------------Again, this isn't the original post. The original post has vanished from the site. It had already gone up at the mirror site and this was copied from that entry. I've spelled "no" correctly but otherwise don't belive I've changed anything. The time stamp on this entry is an approximate for when it posted to the site (via e-mail) originally.

About Me

We do not open attachments. Stop e-mailing them. Threats and abusive e-mail are not covered by any privacy rule. This isn't to the reporters at a certain paper (keep 'em coming, they are funny). This is for the likes of failed comics who think they can threaten via e-mails and then whine, "E-mails are supposed to be private." E-mail threats will be turned over to the FBI and they will be noted here with the names and anything I feel like quoting.
This also applies to anyone writing to complain about a friend of mine. That's not why the public account exists.